From: "m.f.moon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:35912] Re: decimal time
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:29:08 -0800
FWIW, it has been customary for quite some time for DoD contracts to record
timekeeping in 6 minute or 0.1 hours on time cards.
marion moon
------ Original Message ------
Received: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:14:48 PM PST
From: "Martin Vlietstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>Cc:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [USMA:35910] Re: decimal time
John,
I can back up what you wrote. In 1985 I was on a contract where I was
required to clock in and out on a clock that recorded my times in hours and
decimals of an hour.
Regards
Martin
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:20 AM
Subject: [USMA:35894] Re: decimal time
> > The question I raise is not of AN IDEA but *devlopment of a THEME, I
have
>
> Since nothing on my site was based upon your work, nor was Mr. Yoder's
site
> based upon your work, and since the idea was not original to you, you
are
> deserving no credit. The idea you are claiming credit for was in the
public
> domain for centuries, so you cannot claim it as yours. There is nothing
> else about your "theme" except that one idea. There is no mention of
> "Linear standard" or Indus civilization or pi repeating after 5244
decimal
> places, or Kali V-GRhymeCalendar, or Metre New or New Yard, etc.
>
> > It definitely is NOT the question of 'who or when was an individual
born'
>
> It is, if the idea you are claiming possession of was published before
your
> birth!
>
> > BUT that who was the first investigator to INVEST his lifetime &
resources
>
> You certainly were NOT the "first investigator" to come up with this
idea.
> As I have already demonstrated at http://tinyurl.com/9xaxo , a French
> commission under Poincaré considered exactly the same idea in the 1890s.
> Many others have used decimal hours since then. Whatever other ideas
may
be
> included in your "theme", this one idea, the decimal division of the
hour,
> is not original to you.
>
> Read the link I posted, which states that "On 7 April 1897" a French
> commission decided on "keeping the twenty-four-hour clock and
decimalizing
> the hour into 100 minutes with each minute split into 100 seconds." How
can
> you be "the first investigator" to come up with this when it happened in
> 1897? Were you on that commission, sir? Are you over 120 years old?
Are
> you French? If not, then you are using the ideas of others, without
giving
> THEM credit!
>
> --
> John Hynes
> www.decimaltime.org
> 2006 Jan. 28.096 UT
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brij Bhushan Vij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 8:53 AM
> Subject: RE: [USMA:35873] Re: decimal time
>
>
> > John Hynes:
> >>.....If you believe that I am violating your copyright, then you need
to
> >>contact a lawyer and sue >me. You will lose. I will NOT give you
credit
> >>that you do not deserve.
> > The question I raise is not of AN IDEA but *devlopment of a THEME, I
have
> > persued for almost 35 years: from Time/Calendar Metrication to
> > 'investigation that led me to physical dimensions of Indus Culture'
and
my
> > contributions that belong to *history and its research*.
> >>>>>I agree that Foder is not the first person to come up with the
> >>>>idea, but
> >>>>neither are you, and I think it is highly unlikely that he got the
idea
> >>>>from
> >>>>you. I find it offensive that you claim credit for the ideas of
others
> >>>>who
> >>>>died before you were even born!
> > It definitely is NOT the question of 'who or when was an individual
born'
> > BUT that who was the first investigator to INVEST his lifetime &
resources
> > as 'a convinced motivator to lead and bring out RESULTS to show
> > 'misleading
> > myths' for POSITIVE contribution to science & society.
> > I attach my contributed document "Linear Standard in the Indus
> > Civilization
> > published in
> > FRONTIERS OF THE INDUS CIVILIZATION
> > (Sir Mortimer Wheeler Commemoration Volume) by
> > Indian Archeological Society
> > And
> > Indian History and Culture Society, New Delhi.
> > You may have reluctance BUT would like to upload THIS document, and my
> > several contributions at Victor's <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> site, on
> > your
> > site giving due credit.
> > Sincerly,
> > Brij Bhushan Vij
> > (Wednesday, Kali 5106-W41-03)/D-027 (Friday, 2006 January
> > 27H11:89(decimal)
> > ET
> > Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda
> > Jan:31; Feb:29; Mar:31; Apr:30; May:31; Jun:30
> > Jul:30; Aug:31; Sep:30; Oct:31; Nov:30; Dec:30
> > (365th day of Year is World Day)
> > ******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendar******
> > 2108 Henry Court, MAHWAH NJ 07430 (USA)
> > Telephone: +001(201)684-0191
> >
> >
> >>From: "John Hynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> >>Subject: [USMA:35873] Re: decimal time
> >>Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:05:18 -0800
> >>
> >>I did not upload data from an unknown source. I got it from his web
page.
> >>I have only one line referring to him on my site:
> >>
> >>"Jesse Yoder's Flowtime proposes dividing hours into 100 decimal
minutes,
> >>each minute being 36 SI seconds long, but divided into 100 decimal
> >>seconds,
> >>each 0.36 SI seconds long."
> >>
> >>There is a hyperlink in that sentence to his web site at
> >>http://www.flowresearch.com/Flowtime/flowtime.htm. I do not know why
you
> >>cannot click on it. It's also on my links page. There you can find
> >>further information, including an e-mail link. I do not know anything
> >>more
> >>about this person. I have hundreds of links on my site, and I do not
know
> >>the authors of most of them.
> >>
> >>However, I do know that this sentence is not copyrighted by you,
because
> >>this exact type of decimal time was in use before you were even born.
You
> >>cannot copyright something that is in the public domain. Decimal
hours
> >>are
> >>used by many organizations already, and go back at least to the 19th
> >>century. However, it's such an obvious idea that I do not doubt that
both
> >>you and he thought of it independently, and I'm pretty certain that he
> >>never heard of you. Either way, you cannot claim copyright on ideas
> >>already in the public domain. This one idea is not original and you
not
> >>deserve any credit. I have already given you proof of this.
> >>
> >>If you believe that I am violating your copyright, then you need to
> >>contact
> >>a lawyer and sue me. You will lose. I will NOT give you credit that
you
> >>do not deserve.
> >>
> >>--
> >>John Hynes
> >>www.decimaltime.org
> >>2006 Jan. 27.003 UT
> >>
> >>----- Original Message ----- From: "Brij Bhushan Vij"
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]>
> >>Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 2:07 PM
> >>Subject: RE: [USMA:35766] Re: decimal time
> >>
> >>
> >>>John Hynes:
> >>>>I do not possess any contact information for him.
> >>>This is highly UNLIKELY that you uploaded data/information from an
> >>>unknown
> >>>source.
> >>>My search on Jesse Yoder led me into NO MAN's world - Is he/she an
> >>>imaginary charcter?
> >>> "RootsWeb: YODER-L Re: [YODER] Jesse Yoder
> >>>Subject: Re: [YODER] Jesse Yoder Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 12:25:49 EDT.
I'm
> >>>not
> >>>sure if this is the same Jesse Yoder that I'm looking for. Do you ...
> >>>archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/YODER/2002-05/1022689549 - 4k - Cached
-
> >>>Similar pages
> >>>FindArticles search for ""Jesse Yoder""
> >>>View 5 profiles and email results for Jesse Yoder at Reunion.com
Jesse
> >>>Yoder -
> >>>age 22, Colon MI. Jesse Yoder - age 20, Turlock CA. Jesse Yoder - age
20,
> >>>...
> >>>www.findarticles.com/p/ search?tb=art&qt=%22Jesse+Yoder%22 - 29k -
Cached
> >>>- Similar pages
> >>>FindArticles search for ""Jesse Yoder""
> >>>Jesse Yoder - age 20, Turlock CA, Kealakehe High School and more at
> >>>Reunion.com.
> >>>... Find jesse yoder and more at Lycos Search. No clutter, just
answers.
> >>>...
> >>>www.findarticles.com/p/ search?qt=%22Jesse+Yoder%22&qf=qa3739 - 31k -
> >>>Cached - Similar pages
> >>>[Your search -
>
>>>cache:45cn2tf4KgQJ:www.findarticles.com/p/search?qt=%22Jesse+Yoder%22&qf=
qa3739
> >>>Jesse Yoder - did not match any documents.
> >>>Suggestions:
> >>> Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
> >>> Try different keywords.
> >>> Try more general keywords.
> >>> Try fewer keywords. ]"
> >>>I am aware that COPYRIGHT protection is granted for the lifetime of
> >>>AUTHOR
> >>>plus 70 years, after which it becomes public property - like my works
of
> >>>*Investigative nature* on Mohenjo-Daro & Indus Civilisation.
> >>>I reacall having posted my longer document, which I think I also
uploaded
> >>>at Victor's site as:
> >>>http://www.the-light.com/cal/bbv_IndiaContributes.doc
> >>>Kindly accord accredition to my works on your site, and help locate
Jesse
> >>>Yoder - the ONE you quoted at your site: <www.decimaltime.org>
> >>>
> >>>Brij Bhushan Vij
> >>>(Tuesday, Kali 5106-W41-02)/D-026(Thursday, 2006 January 26H
> >>>17:11(decimal) ET
> >>>Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda
> >>>Jan:31; Feb:29; Mar:31; Apr:30; May:31; Jun:30
> >>>Jul:30; Aug:31; Sep:30; Oct:31; Nov:30; Dec:30
> >>>(365th day of Year is World Day)
> >>>******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendar******
> >>>2108 Henry Court, MAHWAH NJ 07430 (USA)
> >>>Telephone: +001(201)684-0191
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>From: "John Hynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> >>>>Subject: [USMA:35766] Re: decimal time
> >>>>Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:10:11 -0800
> >>>>
> >>>>First of all, I have no connection to Jesse Foder or his proposals.
I
> >>>>merely have a link to his site, as well as dozens of other web
sites.
> >>>>If
> >>>>you wish to contact him, you should go to his web site and click on
the
> >>>>email link there. I do not possess any contact information for him.
> >>>>
> >>>>Secondly, you cannot copyright anything that is in the public
domain.
> >>>>You
> >>>>did not invent decimalized hours, because they have been since at
least
> >>>>the
> >>>>19th century, and are currently used by many organizations around
the
> >>>>world.
> >>>>It is such an obvious idea that it has been thought of by many
different
> >>>>people. As documented in Einstein's Clocks, Poincare's Maps:
Empires
of
> >>>>Time by Peter Louis Galison, in the 1890s a French commission
studied
> >>>>the
> >>>>decimalization of times and circumference, and proposed dividing the
> >>>>standard hour into 100 minutes, each of 100 seconds. See
> >>>>http://tinyurl.com/9xaxo (you must have or sign up for a free Google
> >>>>account
> >>>>to read it)
> >>>>
> >>>>I agree that Foder is not the first person to come up with the idea,
but
> >>>>neither are you, and I think it is highly unlikely that he got the
idea
> >>>>from
> >>>>you. I find it offensive that you claim credit for the ideas of
others
> >>>>who
> >>>>died before you were even born! You have no rights and deserve no
> >>>>credit.
> >>>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>John Hynes
> >>>>www.decimaltime.org
> >>>>2006 Jan. 21.123 UT
> >>>>
> >>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Brij Bhushan Vij"
> >>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 8:38 AM
> >>>>Subject: RE: [USMA:35750] Re: decimal time
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>John Hynes & friends:
> >>>>>I recently visited your Home Page and went to Jesse Foder's Flow
Time
> >>>>>Clock
> >>>>>page. I obsrve this as *infringment upon my Copyrighted works*
since
> >>>>>there
> >>>>>has been NO CREDIT granted to me or my contributions.
> >>>>>My communication to Chairman, New York Academy of Science
(Dr.Torsten
> >>>>>Wiesel) of 2002 May 07 refers (see attachment). Kindly provide me
> >>>>>updated
> >>>>><url linking credits to my works>. Please visit:
> >>>>>http://www.the-light.com/cal/ (under bbv_....) and
> >>>>>http://homepage.ntlworld.com/genesis.revealed/ebook/ (also,
Calendar
> >>>>>section
> >>>>>of Parent Directory)
> >>>>>I shall appreciate a note from the AUTHOR, Jesse Yoder & his/her
> >>>>>address
> >>>>>for
> >>>>>contacting.
> >>>>>Thanking you,
> >>>>>Brij Bhushan Vij
> >>>>>(Wednesday, Kali 5106-W40-03)/D-020(Friday, 2006 January
> >>>>>20H11:63(decimal)
> >>>>>ET
> >>>>>Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda
> >>>>>Jan:31; Feb:29; Mar:31; Apr:30; May:31; Jun:30
> >>>>>Jul:30; Aug:31; Sep:30; Oct:31; Nov:30; Dec:30
> >>>>>(365th day of Year is World Day)
> >>>>>******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendar******
> >>>>>2108 Henry Court, MAHWAH NJ 07430 (USA)
> >>>>>Telephone: +001(201)684-0191
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>From: "John Hynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> >>>>>>Subject: [USMA:35750] Re: decimal time
> >>>>>>Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:20:50 -0800
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Some of these terms already have other meanings. For instance:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>the metric mile = 1500 metres exactly (see
> >>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_mile )
> >>>>>>the metric foot = 30 cm exactly (see
> >>>>>>http://www.gwydir.demon.co.uk/jo/units/length.htm )
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>There have been proposals for other metrified English units:
> >>>>>>the metric inch = 25 mm exactly
> >>>>>>the metric yard = 900 mm exactly
> >>>>>>the metric chain = 20 m exactly
> >>>>>>the metric furlong = 200 m exactly
> >>>>>>(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrified_English_unit )
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>--
> >>>>>>John Hynes
> >>>>>>www.decimaltime.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Naughtin"
> >>>>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>>>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> >>>>>>Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 3:40 PM
> >>>>>>Subject: [USMA:35748] Re: decimal time
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Dear Phil,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Thanks for your analysis, below.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>This is why I refer to the post-1959 measures as:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>the metric inch = 25.4 millimetres exactly,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>the metric foot = 304.8 millimetres exactly,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>the metric yard = 914.4 millimetres exactly,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>the metric chain = 20.116 8 metres exactly,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>the metric furlong = 201.16 8 metres exactly, and
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>the metric mile = 1 609.344 metres exactly.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I do this because I find that their descriptively accurate title,
> >>>>>>>'post-1959
> >>>>>>>measures with quaint old pre-metric names' too cumbersome.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Cheers,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Pat Naughtin
> >>>>>>>PO Box 305 Belmont 3216
> >>>>>>>Geelong, Australia
> >>>>>>>61 3 5241 2008
> >>>>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>>>http://www.metricationmatters.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>This email and its attachments are for the sole use of the
addressee
> >>>>>>>and
> >>>>>>>may
> >>>>>>>contain information that is confidential and/or legally
privileged.
> >>>>>>>This
> >>>>>>>email and its attachments are subject to copyright and should not
be
> >>>>>>>partly
> >>>>>>>or wholly reproduced without the consent of the copyright owner.
Any
> >>>>>>>unauthorised use of disclosure of this email or its attachments
is
> >>>>>>>prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please
immediately
> >>>>>>>delete
> >>>>>>>it
> >>>>>>>from your system and notify the sender by return email.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>On 20/01/06 10:13 AM, "Philip S Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>It is interesting to note that not only is a yard defined as
0.9144
> >>>>>>>>>m
> >>>>>>>>>but
> >>>>>>>>>the inch is not defined as 1/36 of a yard but as 25.4 mm
(exactly).
> >>>>>>>>>Therefore, customary measures are all defined by metric ones
and
> >>>>>>>>>not
> >>>>>>>>>in
> >>>>>>>>>relation to each other.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>If you do the arithmetic you will find that:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>0.0254 * 12 = 0.3048,
> >>>>>>>>36 * 0.0254 = 3 * 0.3048 = 0.9144
> >>>>>>>>0.9144 * 1760 = 1 609.344
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>all being exact with no rounding.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Hence:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>(a) 1 in = 0.0254 m, 1 ft = 12 in
> >>>>>>>>(b) 1 ft = 0.3048 m, 1 in = 1/12 ft
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Are equivalent statements, as are
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>(c) 1 ft = 0.3048 m, 1 yd = 3 ft
> >>>>>>>>(d) 1 yd = 0.9144 m, 1 ft = 1/3 yd
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>and so on.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Hence to define linear imperial measures all that is requires is
the
> >>>>>>>>absolute size of one of them (e.g. 1 yd = 0.9144 m) , and then
state
> >>>>>>>>the
> >>>>>>>>ratios between all the others. True enough we usually do see the
> >>>>>>>>absolute
> >>>>>>>>sizes tabulated rather than the ratios but it doesn't alter
> >>>>>>>>anything.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>The real bombshell (if they only but knew it) is the use of that
> >>>>>>>>word
> >>>>>>>>"exact" in relation to the figures 0.0254, 0.3048, ...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>When it comes to the real world there is no such thing as
"exact".
> >>>>>>>>All
> >>>>>>>>measurements have a tolerance however small it may be. Hence
> >>>>>>>>imperial
> >>>>>>>>measures are *tied* to metric by an abstract idealised
relationship.
> >>>>>>>>Imperial can have no independent physical definition of its own
on
> >>>>>>>>that
> >>>>>>>>basis.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Phil Hall
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
